Another sign of wedge among SC judges shows up

In another display of the division among Supreme Court judges, Justice Sayyed Mazahar Ali Akbar Naqvi has accused Justice Sardar Tariq Masood of ‘deliberately’ delaying his opinion over the complaints of misconduct against him with ‘nefarious design'.

“I am fully justified in saying that the delay in forwarding the opinion by the said judge [Justice Masood] is intentional, deliberate and based upon nefarious design and there is every likelihood that the undersigned [Justice Naqvi] will not be treated justly, fairly and in accordance with law,” wrote Justice Naqvi in his letter written to Chief Justice of Pakistan Umar Ata Bandial, who is also the chairman of the Supreme Judicial Council (SJC) -- a constitutional forum for taking action over complaints of misconduct against superior court judges.

Justice Naqvi in his letter added that reportedly, a number of frivolous complaints had been filed against him in the SJC in the recent past -- being part of a malicious campaign against the judiciary in general and him in particular.

In the complaints, it has been alleged that Justice Naqvi had bought a property, which was higher in price against its value declared in the revenue record and income tax returns.

“Without touching upon the merits of the same, I want to draw your kind attention that according to Para 7 of the Supreme Judicial Council Procedure of Enquiry, 2005, once any information/complaint in respect of enquiry into the conduct of a judge is received by the council, it shall be presented to the chairman of the council, who at the first instance will send it to any member of the council to look into the said information/complaint and to express his opinion in relation to sufficiency or otherwise of the information,” the letter read.

“In the case of the undersigned, according to press reports, the complaints were referred to Mr Justice Sardar Tariq Masood on 29.05.2023 for expressing his opinion with regard to sufficiency or otherwise of the complaints. It is a matter of record that the said judge had written two letters dated 03.04.2023 and 26.04.2023 to the members of the Supreme Judicial Council and the undersigned showing his impatience and eagerness to initiate the proceedings before the Supreme Judicial Council,” it continued.

Justice Naqvi further wrote that the conduct of Justice Masood was not only surprising rather it was unprecedented and never ever a member of the SJC had acted in the manner as mentioned earlier.

“It is also worth mentioning that several complaints against sitting judges are lying with [the] secretary of the council but only the undersigned has been targeted, which reflects [the] wilful mindset of the said judge against the undersigned,” Justice Naqvi informed the CJP.

“It is quite contrary to the afore-noted conduct of the said judge, while showing his anxiousness to initiate the proceedings, now despite of referring the matter to him on 29.05.2023 by the Chairman [of the] Supreme Judicial Council for expressing his opinion, no opinion has been rendered by him even after [a] lapse of more than 43 days on the pretext that due to summer vacations, he has preferred to take rest rather to perform his constitutional duty, which clearly shows that the matter is being kept waiting wilfully with ill-design,” the letter stated.

“In Para 9 of the Procedure of Enquiry, it is mentioned therein that if the council decides to proceed against a judge, a period of 14 days will be given to him to explain his position. If the analogy from the same is drawn, the Hon’ble Judge (Justice Sardar Tariq Masood) to whom the matter has been referred for opinion is under obligation to render his opinion within a reasonable time, which may not exceed 14 days as mentioned for a judge who is to respond,” Justice Naqvi further wrote to the top judge.

Justice Naqvi observed that the courts of the world had been operating since centuries on the very basic principle that justice should not only be done but also be seen to be carried out.

“But unfortunately, I regret to say that in case of the undersigned this does not seem to be applied. In view of the foregoing, I am fully justified in saying that the delay in forwarding the opinion by the said judge is intentional, deliberate and based upon nefarious design and there is every likelihood that the undersigned will not be treated justly, fairly and in accordance with law,” Justice Naqvi concluded.